Contingencies

Litigation

The Company is currently involved in certain litigation that arises in the ordinary course of business, most of which is expected to be covered by liability insurance. Management makes assumptions and estimates concerning the likelihood and amount of any potential loss relating to these matters using the latest information available. The Company records a liability for litigation if an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of loss or range of loss can be reasonably estimated. If an unfavorable outcome is probable and a reasonable estimate of the loss is a range, the Company accrues the best estimate within the range. If no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the Company accrues the minimum amount within the range. If an unfavorable outcome is probable but the amount of the loss cannot be reasonably estimated, the Company discloses the nature of the litigation and indicates that an estimate of the loss or range of loss cannot be made. If an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible and the estimated loss is material, the Company discloses the nature and estimate of the possible loss of the litigation. Based on current expectations, such matters, both individually and in the aggregate, are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the liquidity, results of operations, business or financial condition of the Company.

On May 27, 2016, Tommy French filed a putative class action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on behalf of himself and all persons who purchased the Company's common stock between August 8, 2013 and May 24, 2016. Two additional suits were filed shortly thereafter with similar allegations. On June 9, 2016, The Allan J. and Sherry R. Potts Living Trust filed a putative class action in the same Court on behalf of the trust and all persons who purchased the Company's common stock between August 8, 2013 and May 24, 2016, and on June 24, 2016, International Union of Painters & Allied Trades District Council No. 35 Pension Plan filed another putative class action in the same Court on behalf of itself and all persons who purchased the Company's common stock between August 9, 2011 and May 24, 2016, containing similar allegations. On July 26, 2016, motions were submitted to the Court for the consolidation of these three cases, as well as for the appointment of a lead plaintiff. The deadline for the Court to act to appoint a lead plaintiff is September 1, 2016. All three of these complaints are based on substantially similar allegations that certain of the Company’s financing arrangements were obtained through fraud and/or misrepresentation, and that the Company and certain of its officers and directors made materially misleading statements to the market by failing to disclose material information concerning these alleged misrepresentations, and concerning the supposed involvement by insiders of the Company in alleged trading in the Company’s stock by a United States senator on the basis of material nonpublic information. Based on these allegations, these complaints assert claims for violation of the securities laws and seek a variety of relief, including unspecified monetary damages as well as costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes these complaints are without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously.

On July 29, 2016, Henry Shebitz filed a shareholder derivative suit in the Chancery Court for Hamilton County, Tennessee alleging that the Company's directors, three former directors and certain current and former officers breached their fiduciary duties by causing the Company to make materially misleading statements to the market by failing to disclose material information concerning these alleged misrepresentations, and concerning the supposed involvement by insiders of the Company in alleged trading in the Company’s stock by a United States senator on the basis of material nonpublic information. The complaint further alleges that certain of the Company's current and former officers and directors improperly engaged in transactions in the Company’s stock while in possession of material nonpublic information concerning the Company’s alleged misleading statements. The complaint purports to seek relief on behalf of the Company for unspecified damages as well as costs and attorneys’ fees. The Company believes that this complaint is without merit and intend to defend against it vigorously.

Environmental Contingencies

The Company evaluates potential loss contingencies related to environmental matters using the same criteria described above related to litigation matters. Based on current information, an unfavorable outcome concerning such environmental matters, both individually and in the aggregate, is considered to be reasonably possible. However, the Company believes its maximum potential exposure to loss would not be material to its results of operations or financial condition. The Company has a master insurance policy that provides coverage through 2022 for certain environmental claims up to $10,000 per occurrence and up to $50,000 in the aggregate, subject to deductibles and certain exclusions. At certain locations, individual policies are in place.

Guarantees

The Operating Partnership may guarantee the debt of a joint venture primarily because it allows the joint venture to obtain funding at a lower cost than could be obtained otherwise. This results in a higher return for the joint venture on its investment, and a higher return on the Operating Partnership’s investment in the joint venture. The Operating Partnership may receive a fee from the joint venture for providing the guaranty. Additionally, when the Operating Partnership issues a guaranty, the terms of the joint venture agreement typically provide that the Operating Partnership may receive indemnification from the joint venture partner or have the ability to increase its ownership interest. The guarantees expire upon repayment of the debt, unless noted otherwise.

The following table represents the Operating Partnership's guarantees of unconsolidated affiliates' debt as reflected in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015:



	As of June 30, 2016									Obligation recorded to reflect guaranty
Unconsolidated Affiliate	Company's Ownership Interest	Outstanding Balance		Percentage Guaranteed by the Operating Partnership		Maximum Guaranteed Amount		Debt Maturity Date ⁽¹⁾		6/30/2016		12/31/2015
West Melbourne I, LLC - Phase I	50%	$	43,147	20%	⁽²⁾	$	8,629	Feb-2018	⁽³⁾	$	86	$	99
West Melbourne I, LLC - Phase II	50%	16,677		20%	⁽²⁾	3,335		Feb-2018	⁽³⁾	33		87
Port Orange I, LLC	50%	58,348		20%	⁽²⁾	11,670		Feb-2018	⁽³⁾	117		148
Fremaux Town Center JV, LLC - Phase I	65%	—		—%	⁽⁴⁾	—		Aug-2016		—		62
Fremaux Town Center JV, LLC - Phase II	65%	—		—%	⁽⁴⁾	—		Aug-2016		—		161
Ambassador Town Center JV, LLC	65%	—		—%	⁽⁴⁾	—		Dec-2017		—		462
Ambassador Infrastructure, LLC	65%	11,700		100%	⁽⁵⁾	11,700		Dec-2017	⁽⁶⁾	177		177
				Total guaranty liability						$	413	$	1,196


(1)	Excludes any extension options.


(2)	The guaranty was reduced from 25% to 20% when the loan was modified and extended in February 2016. See Note 5.


(3)	The loan has a one-year extension option, which is at the unconsolidated affiliate's election, for an outside maturity date of February 2019.


(4)	The guaranty was removed in June 2016 when the construction loan was retired using proceeds from a non-recourse mortgage loan. See Note 5 for additional information.


(5)	The guaranty will be reduced to 50% on March 1st of such year as payment-in-lieu of taxes ("PILOT") payments received and attributed to the prior calendar year by Ambassador Infrastructure and delivered to the lender are $1,200 or more, provided no event of default exists. The guaranty will be reduced to 20% when the PILOT payments are $1,400 or more, provided no event of default exists.


(6)	The loan has two one-year extension options, which are the unconsolidated affiliate's election, for an outside maturity date of December 2019.

The Company has guaranteed the lease performance of York Town Center, LP ("YTC"), an unconsolidated affiliate in which the Company owns a 50% interest, under the terms of an agreement with a third party that owns property as part of York Town Center. Under the terms of that agreement, YTC is obligated to cause performance of the third party’s obligations as landlord under its lease with its sole tenant, including, but not limited to, provisions such as co-tenancy and exclusivity requirements. Should YTC fail to cause performance, then the tenant under the third party landlord’s lease may pursue certain remedies ranging from rights to terminate its lease to receiving reductions in rent. The Company has guaranteed YTC’s performance under this agreement up to a maximum of $22,000, which decreases by $800 annually until the guaranteed amount is reduced to $10,000. The guaranty expires on December 31, 2020. The maximum guaranteed obligation was $14,800 as of June 30, 2016. The Company entered into an agreement with its joint venture partner under which the joint venture partner has agreed to reimburse the Company 50% of any amounts it is obligated to fund under the guaranty. The Company did not include an obligation for this guaranty because it determined that the fair value of the guaranty was not material as of June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

Performance Bonds

The Company has issued various bonds that it would have to satisfy in the event of non-performance. The total amount outstanding on these bonds was $16,250 and $16,452 at June 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.